Two Arrested With Stolen Car Full Of Stuff To Huff And Puff And Toke And Smoke And Suck And Shoot Up – December 21, 2011

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

ARCATA MARSH – On Tuesday Dec. 20, 2011 at about 7:45 a.m., the Arcata Police Department received information about a vehicle that was reported stolen in Arcata on Monday, Dec. 19.

Daniel Allan Rausch

It was reported by a citizen that the vehicle was at the Arcata Marsh, located at the end of I Street. Officers responded to the area and found the vehicle parked and occupied by two males, later identified as 31-year-old Daniel Allan Rausch, and 28-year-old Aaron Zachery Huber. Rausch and Huber were taken into custody without incident.

A search incident to arrest revealed that Rausch was in possession of suspected methamphetamine, suspected heroin and hypodermic syringes. Huber was in possession of suspected concentrated cannabis and hypodermic syringes.

“The car was full of stuff to huff and puff and toke and smoke and suck and shoot up and whatever else can be done with drugs,” the owner told the Eye after recovering the vehicle. “It also had lots of stolen stuff in it like tools and bikes and backpacks and skateboards and iPods and cell phones.”

A witness said that Rausch was the alpha of the duo, and that Huber was indignant on his arrest, loudly protesting his innocence. “I didn’t know it was stolen!” he wailed unconvincingly.

Aaron Zachery Huber

Rausch and Huber were booked into the Humboldt County Correctional Facility on the following charges:

Kevin, I wonder why they were charged with the lesser charge of receiving stolen property rather than the greater charge of theft of a vehicle over $4000? Could there be more to the story of who stole the car?

True about their appearance, I thought they were in their 40’s. I am puzzled, however, at the charges. Cal PC496 (if this is the final charge) is one step removed from theft. It is receiving stolen property. Who did they receive it from? Divine providence? And if they convinced authorities that they did not actually steal the car (that’s hard to believe), the neighborhood is still left with the worry that it was stolen by someone known to one of our near-by households. We certainly do not know these two. Maybe someone knows more than I do about how charges are determined…

Those are good questions, and ‘ll find out more for the print edition.

Generally speaking, when a crime goes down police confer with the DA’s Office about the evidence at hand and prefer charges that they are confident will secure convictions. There are a lot of nuances and disqualifiers in the law, and some charges, while seemingly justified, can be easily dismissed or prove superfluous in terms of actual sentencing.

The charge of possession of stolen property is much simpler to prove in a court of law versus being able to prove that they actually STOLE the vehicle. The vehicle could have changed hands a few times before the “end user” acquires it.

One thing about this experience that shouldn’t be overlooked is that my car was rescued because my neighbor spotted it. And he spotted it because we stay in touch so neighbors can be aware of safety and security. That is called a good community. In addition, 27 people on FaceBook reposted the picture of the car to their friends and that is community as well. I really needed my car, there is no plan B for another one, and I feel very fortunate not only to have it returned intact, but also to know that people are looking out for one another. Big appreciation!

I agree with Rose, they will be out in no time even though one is on parole. The jail is too full since the changes Oct 1 with inmates being sent to the counties. Unfortunately they are addicts, their backpacks and bicycles suggest they don’t have housing and I can only hope they don’t return to Arcata. Lock it up folks, and that means everything everytime.

Receiving v theft
When there is any appreciable time lag between committing the crimes and getting caught (article suggests a day) law enforcement has learned that judges and juries buy the defense that “some other dude stole it and gave me this stuff” enough to acquit on the theft/burglary but are
embarrassed enough by this moral cowardice to convict on receiving.
The claim “I did not know” suggests some experience with the system.
For a thoroughly hilarious discussion of CA law on the issue, see

Possession of stolen property is all that can be charged when it cannot be PROVEN that the person(s) occupying a stolen vehicle did indeed actually steal it. For what it is worth, same sentence for both crimes.

You guys should do the plant an expensive bike and catch the crook boosting it routine. Isn’t stealing a $1200.00 Cannondale Mountain bike a felony? Or a Schwinn Touring bike. I HATE bike thieves. Especially when someone such as myself has to actually labor in order to obtain said bike. When they are not trust fund babies of the nouveau riche peoples in Humboldt. Or those who stand about with their hands out at the Goodwill or Salvation Army and everything is handed to them.

487h. (a) Every person who steals, takes, or carries away cargo of
another, if the cargo taken is of a value exceeding nine hundred
fifty dollars ($950), except as provided in Sections 487, 487a, and
487d, is guilty of grand theft.
(b) For the purposes of this section, “cargo” means any goods,
wares, products, or manufactured merchandise that has been loaded
into a trailer, railcar, or cargo container, awaiting or in transit.

Update on this case: Rausch showed up in court today, pled guilty to 2 misdemeanor drug possession charges, got probation plus 3 jail days, fines suspended. No “receiving stolen property” charges at all. Huber didn’t show, had $25,000 bond issued.
Looks like the DA’s office doesn’t think that sneaking down a private driveway at night and stealing a car and its contents is a very important crime. As the victim, I think it is not only high enough monetary value to be serious, it is also scary. The charges do not ameliorate my loss.

Just after 5 pm, called the court, the case against the second guy, Aaron Huber, has been disposed so I won’t be going to court in the morning. Under § 496(a), anyone “who buys or receives any property that has been stolen or that has been obtained in any manner constituting theft . . . knowing the property to be so stolen or obtained . . . shall be punished by imprisonment in a state prison . . . for not more than one year.” I think they should not have let Rausch off, he knew full well the car was stolen and APD knew that he knew because he tried to walk away when he saw the police cars arriving.

Tomorrow I will call the DA’s office to see if I can learn the outcome for Huber. I am curious to know what the final charges were and how it was settled.

Every day I am grateful to have my car returned although I miss my glasses. There has been no mention of the loss of personal items and tools from my car. My glasses frames were an irreplaceable gift from the parents of a friend who died. He was an assistant DA. Ironic.

The DA’s office just called to inform me not to come in. Mr. Huber (??? so polite in legal circles) pled guilty to possession of stolen property and possession of hypodermic needles. Sentencing will be mid-April.